The American believes putter length should be capped and be equal or less than the shortest club in the golfer's bag. Scott was not a fan of that idea.

"His voice carries some weight on the issue, a lot of players have been quite outspoken about it and certainly when Tiger Woods speaks about it generates a lot of interest," the 32-year-old said of arguably the world's greatest golfer.

"But I'm not necessarily sure his views on what the putter should be are correct at all, I don't think the putter should be the shortest club in the bag, that has never been a rule in golf so I don't know why it should be now."

What does it mean to say that the putter must be the shortest club in the bag? Does it mean that if your ball is on the green you must use the shortest club in your bag to hit it? If not, then just call your (oversized) putter your driver and claim that you're putting with your driver.

hmm, to be fair, I think Tiger's shortest club in the bag idea came from his desire to figure out a way to end anchoring (and was clearly misguided), rather then a real desire to control the length of putters.

the simplest solution is to apply the same rules to putters as to other clubs; specifically, the putter shaft has to be straight (not bent) and must connect at the end of the putter (not in the middle). if putters cannot be center-balanced, none of these belly or long putter methods are effective.

<< its not that anyone is a great putter or not, but some, such as Scottie here, are much better than they would have otherwise been. >>

And my response to that is: "Yeah, so what?" So what if a few yippy pros (and a few thousand amateurs) putt a LITTLE better with a longer, anchored putter? You, Geoff, and a number of others give no cogent reason for a ban except, I presume, that "it doesn't look good."

Well, boo hoo. Until great putters become greater by never missing inside 12 feet and making almost everything from 20 or 30, the idea that an anchored putter is "bad for the game" is nothing but hooey-filled claptrap.

Let's get the USGA to do something that will actually HELP the game: rein in distance via the ball and what-was-already-illegal Spring Effect and you'll save money on course expansion, course maintenance and thus collaterally, you'll have faster play and lower green fees. (The two biggest obstacles in the way of golf's survival.)

Banning longer putters will rank right up there on the list of Momentous Decisions with the genius move to "fix" the grooves.

If instituted, they say the ban will become effective in 2016. My wish is that EVERY major and DOZENS of important events, both professional and amateur are won with longer putters.

Wow! A bit of PASSION (caps sub for italics) in our writing this afternoon! Did you and the guys slurp down a couple of extra margaritas?The problem is that we are on the verge of ''making the regular putter go the way of the persimmon driver'' as was so shockingly stated earlier today.

<< BS...do tell how a different ball will lower maintenance costs, lower green fees and speed up play. >>

Really? Okay, here we go.

A shorter ball and a muffled driver will immediately eliminate the need for longer new courses and expanding current layouts. Shorter golf courses will mean less land required and thus reduced upkeep by maintenance crews. Shorter golf courses means less time spent ON the golf course resulting in faster play. (Also: amateurs won't be constantly thinking "I can hit this par 5 in two so I'm going to wait until that group gets off the green.") Shorter golf courses = less upkeep = fewer crew members and land costs = reduced green fees.

And about this: << The problem is that we are on the verge of ''making the regular putter go the way of the persimmon driver'' as was so shockingly stated earlier today. >>

Yeah, so what? If every golfer was wielding an anchored putter, I'm doubting overall scoring wouldn't change one bit. Perhaps your jittery grandpa loses his case of the yips and now wants to get out there a few more times each summer. That's bad?

Again: If the anchored putter was a decided advantage then EVERYBODY WOULD BE USING IT. Many try the long stick and find that it doesn't help.... they still putt like crap. (Ask Phil M.) Even that lyin' cheatin' Adam Scott, whose game was Totally Turned Around by the long putter barely moved an inch in the putting stats. The two top cheaters in the Strokes Gained category are Carl Petterson at number 20 and Keegan Bradley lists at 28. It's THAT kind of non-dominance that makes a ban necessary?

Please: somebody show me some statistics that say the long putter provides a Measurable Genuine Advantage and I'll change my tune in a microsecond. (Well, by 2016, anyway.)

This reminds me of the great Sam Snead who attempted to hold the putter croquet stile. The PGA ruled it illegal. Now sixty years later the duffers and wanta bees are asking to use Belly Props and Garden Hoes to roll the ball on the green. If you will study the origin of golf you will find that the intent was to only anchor the grip of the club to the hands and touch no other part of the body,. If Adam scott and all of the other duffers out there can't use the regulation putter that has been used for over 100 years then go home and take up ditch digging or garbage collecting. This whole thing actually started when the biggest cheat in golf, Paul Azinger, Built a belly putter in his garage and was allowed to use it.

If they ban anchoring the putter, is your hand touching your body and not the end of the putter still anchoring the club? Long and belly putters have been used for many decades. It is a ridiculous move if they approve this ban. If they do then the players need to get togetherand boycott tournaments to show they will not let the change go quietly!

<< This whole thing actually started when the biggest cheat in golf, Paul Azinger, Built a belly putter in his garage and was allowed to use it. >>

Not quite. Although Zinger loves to fabricate the tale that he "invented" the belly putter, it's on record that Paul Runyan actually came up with the idea way back in the 1930's. I saw Runyan's protege, touring pro Chuck Courtney, also use one in San Diego when I was a toddler in the 1960's.

Bringing up another good point: if it's been around for more than 70 years and it worked so damn well, then where's the wave of fantastic flatstickers rolling them in from everywhere? I must have missed that.

If your going to claim anchored putters are an advantage for mediocre putters than why not let players use things like beta blockers or peds? this is a game off individual talent and performance & if a longer putter helps a player perform then everyone should have an opportunity to level the advantage. Frankly the Usga rarely considers rule changes as it to ams and should not be the body making the rules for the tour as it relates to equipment. all that said I'd like to see the broom stick putter go away while allowing the belly be allowed assuming it's capped at 45 inches. Just my thoughts.

BS....if you think a golf course that is 500 yards shorter will have any impact on the overall maintenance costs, you're not living in the real world. As for amateurs waiting to hit a par 5 in 2, for the most part they will catch up before the end of a round. They were waiting to begin with. Your arguments are BS I'm afraid

Tighthead - Good point. The bullseye isn't center-balanced, and I don't think the anser is either, so they don't really "need" to be banned. My point is just that it is the center-balancing that makes long putters feasible (and generally makes putting much easier). Requiring all putter shafts to connect at the end (like with other clubs) is just the simplest, most clear-cut (or bright line) rule I can think of that would solve the problem.

I think the R&A and USGA are just considering the anchoring of the putter. It is pretty hard to decide if a long putter is of any advantage, but actual anchoring of the putter is in breach of rule 14-2 A, physical assistance or protection from the elements. I have noticed that players do have an advantage if they can steady themselves by leaning on the putter, in windy conditiiions.

Anchoring the club is akin to using a TEACHING aide plain and simple. I have a plastic thing that attaches to the end of a regular putter (into the hole in the end of the grip) and then has a wide bracket/cradle that one affixes to their upper torso and under the upper arms...it is designed to help "anchor" the club to the body and lets the clubhead swing thru...EXACTLY like a belly putter does today.

Add a new condition of competition under local PGAT rules that bans anchoring and defines them as teaching aides and the problem goes away.

Note: I have more of a problem with belly putters than the broomstick Scott uses...at least the broomstick forces a golfer to learn a new posture and stance, stroke with only one hand applying power, etc...the belly is nothing but a crutch.

If you don't believe me then just checkout howMarco Dawson uses the belly. I saw on TV a few weeks ago how he starts off by setting the putter behind the ball with both hands, takes BOTH hands OFF the club, and then he leans his body/belly into the shaft/grip like one would prop up a rickety fence in high winds with a metal pole!!!! Now if someone can honestly tell me they could do that with anything OTHER than a fulcrum powered "long" putter then I got some magic beans to sell ya along with a NY bridge.

Sorry, but what is funny is that people defend the long putter because it supposedly helps/improves your putting (good or bad). My thought on this is when I see my friends/ or pro's, converting to a long putter makes me chuckle a bit because they think that it makes them a better golfer. If your a beginner or pro, you have a putting stoke regardless of the length. If you suck at putting... practice your short game more than your swings. New technology (longer putter) is getting a little outta hand at this point. Lets use something that should be considered as a training aid on the practice green to help with your putting stroke and keep it there. My final thought on this is if you have to anchor the butt end of the putter... btw, it is a fricken training aid that adds a third point of contact which I believe that you don't need on any other club in the bag, try practicing. For those that converted... did you enjoy spending the money on a training aid that may or may not work for you? Because the manufacturer does dumb ass's!

Considering that my long (broomstick) putter was the first club I ever built, I have plenty to say, but it will all be opinion. What I want to add to the discussion holds some hope out for broomstick putters. As long as there is no assinine length restriction you can use a broomstick putter, and develop a nice stroke, WITHOUT anchoring to your chest or chin. I just grab the end of the putter with my left hand and let it hang (that's a key...don't try to lie the clubhead flat on the ground...ignor the lie angle of the shaft and just let it hang). position your left hand about an inch away from your chest and point your left elbow down the putting line. Grip the clup loosely with your lower hand and putt with the rocking action of your upper body. The chest/chin anchor is replaced by the anchor created by your fairly rigid left hand and arm. It works great. Also, very few golfer "anchor" their broomsticks the same way belly putters are anchored. There is a big difference. I think my new putting method will be legal as long as I can have a 48-52 inch length club in the bag.